Hi K.L.,
> Without layout structures, we can store music staff in a more regular way,
> like this:
How does that work with polymetric music?
Thanks,
Kieren.
Kieren MacMillan, composer (he/him/his)
‣ website: www.kierenmacmillan.info
‣ email:
At 15:45 on 15 Nov 2020, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 15:13 + schrieb Mark Knoop:
>> At 15:08 on 15 Nov 2020, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
>>> Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 10:04 -0500 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
Hi all,
This discussion/development/enhancement —
Hi all,
> Looks like my recollection was wrong here: In most *classical* scores.
> The medleys of film music that I played in (hobby) orchestras mostly
> use rehearsal marks and / or bar numbers *below* bar lines.
Yes.
>> Measure-centred bar numbers are fairly standard in film scores.
>
> Do
Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 15:13 + schrieb Mark Knoop:
> At 15:08 on 15 Nov 2020, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 10:04 -0500 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > This discussion/development/enhancement — which is happening just
> > > after a thread on
Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 10:14 -0500 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
> Hi Jonas,
>
> > I think that's a totally different topic and not actually related to
> > positioning the usual bar numbers that are above the bar line in all
> > scores that I ever played from.
>
> Why? We’re talking about
At 15:01 on 15 Nov 2020, Joram Noeck wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I like the change in the bar number alignment. I have some comments to
> your proposal. (The current solution has similar issues, so most of
> these are not speaking against proposed changes.)
>
> The -> denotes the solution for which that is
> Those are included in the examples purely for the sake of completeness.
> Gould has nothing to say about such bar numbers and I would surprised if
> any scores included them.
But is it possible that they have a different alignment with the current
code? In case a user turns them on, they would
Hi Jonas,
> I think that's a totally different topic and not actually related to
> positioning the usual bar numbers that are above the bar line in all
> scores that I ever played from.
Why? We’re talking about selecting the position of usual bar numbers, right? I
think the user should be able
> This discussion/development/enhancement — which is happening just
> after a thread on the FB group about centred measure numbers — has
> made me wonder if it’s possible to roll measure-centred measure
> numbers into the actual BarNumber code [instead of forcing people to
> (ab)use
At 15:08 on 15 Nov 2020, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 10:04 -0500 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> This discussion/development/enhancement — which is happening just
>> after a thread on the FB group about centred measure numbers — has
>> made me wonder if it’s
Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 10:04 -0500 schrieb Kieren MacMillan:
> Hi all,
>
> This discussion/development/enhancement — which is happening just
> after a thread on the FB group about centred measure numbers — has
> made me wonder if it’s possible to roll measure-centred measure
> numbers into
Hi all,
This discussion/development/enhancement — which is happening just after a
thread on the FB group about centred measure numbers — has made me wonder if
it’s possible to roll measure-centred measure numbers into the actual BarNumber
code [instead of forcing people to (ab)use
> I would very much like that LilyPond has the ability of automatically
> adjusting the horizontal position of some grobs, in particular dynamic
> signs, bar numbers, and rehearsal marks. The idea is that a large
> delta from the optimum vertical position would make LilyPond retry to
>
Hi,
I like the change in the bar number alignment. I have some comments to
your proposal. (The current solution has similar issues, so most of
these are not speaking against proposed changes.)
The -> denotes the solution for which that is an argument.
1. putting the bar number over the measure
On Nov 15, 2020, at 05:20, K.L. wrote:
>
> We can define a new DSL to express all kinds of repeat types, including
> volta, volta-alternative and *D.C. al Fine* and so on. For some examples:
. . .
>
> Via this, exact MIDI performing for D.C. & D.S. can also be done.
I doubt that it is
Am Sonntag, den 15.11.2020, 14:27 + schrieb Kevin Barry:
> On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 01:37:34PM +, Graham King wrote:
> > I think Gould's positioning looks _slightly_ better, except at
> > line-beginnings where I definitely prefer lilypond's. Moreover, the
> > position immediately after a
> I appreciate that you have given a nuanced response. Practically
> speaking, the vast majority of scores only have bar numbers at the
> beginning of a line, so I will simplistically categorise your response
> as in favour of keeping LilyPond's current behaviour.
I would very much like that
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 01:37:34PM +, Graham King wrote:
> I think Gould's positioning looks _slightly_ better, except at
> line-beginnings where I definitely prefer lilypond's. Moreover, the
> position immediately after a bar line is heavily-contested
> real-estate, as your examples make
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 07:07:03AM -0600, David Nalesnik wrote:
> Another vote for Gould. (Though does she have anything to say about
> the normally unshown measure numbers which are stranded beyond the
> line here?)
Those are included in the examples purely for the sake of completeness.
Gould
I think Gould's positioning looks _slightly_ better, except at line-beginnings
where I definitely prefer lilypond's. Moreover, the position immediately after
a bar line is heavily-contested real-estate, as your examples make clear.
Therefore it would be good to retain the option to preserve
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 6:11 AM Michael Käppler wrote:
>
> Am 15.11.2020 um 12:36 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
> >> I will be the first responder and say that, of the options in the
> >> pdf, I think Gould is the most appropriate.
> > Yep.
> +1
> >
> >
> > Werner
> >
>
>
Another vote for Gould.
Am 15.11.2020 um 12:36 schrieb Werner LEMBERG:
I will be the first responder and say that, of the options in the
pdf, I think Gould is the most appropriate.
Yep.
+1
Werner
> I will be the first responder and say that, of the options in the
> pdf, I think Gould is the most appropriate.
Yep.
Werner
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 11:02:52AM +, Kevin Barry wrote:
> - if you have a preference for one of the four, please indicate which
I will be the first responder and say that, of the options in the pdf, I
think Gould is the most appropriate.
Kevin
The blog link is missed, appended here:
https://findlab.github.io/2020/11/15/music-layout-language/
On Sun, Nov 15, 2020 at 6:20 PM K.L. wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> For a multiple voices music score, all voices share the same repeat
> positions. Such as:
>
> <<
>> {
>> \repeat volta 2 { g1 g g g
Hi all.
For a multiple voices music score, all voices share the same repeat
positions. Such as:
<<
> {
> \repeat volta 2 { g1 g g g }
> \repeat volta 2 { g g g g }
> }
> {
> \repeat volta 2 { c1 c c c }
> \repeat volta 2 { c c c c }
> }
> >>
The repeat layout
26 matches
Mail list logo
